MICHAEL J. MOORE, ON BEHALF OF HIMSELF AND ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED, AND CHRIS DAVIS, ON BEHALF OF HIMSELF AND ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED, APPELLANTS,
v.
CITY OF ST. PETERSBURG, FLORIDA, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, AND THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE ST. PETERSBURG FIREMEN'S RETIREMENT SYSTEM AND SUPPLEMENTAL RETIREMENT SYSTEM, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court affirmed dismissal of a civil action by retirement system beneficiaries alleging plan underfunding because they failed to exhaust administrative remedies under the Florida Administrative Procedures Act before pursuing judicial relief.
Beneficiaries of a retirement system must exhaust administrative remedies under the Florida Administrative Procedures Act before bringing a civil action challenging plan underfunding.
[1] Beneficiaries of a municipal retirement system must exhaust administrative remedies under the Florida Administrative Procedures Act before bringing a civil action challen…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceBeneficiaries of the St. Petersburg Firemen's Retirement System and Supplemental Retirement System brought a civil action against the City and the Boa…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Breach Of Fiduciary Duty (Implied) cases and more on FLexlaw
THREADGILL, Chief Judge.
The appellants, beneficiaries of the St. Pe-tersburg Firemen’s Retirement System and Supplemental Retirement System, brought a civil action against the City and the retirement system’s Board of Trustees, alleging under-funding of the retirement plan. The trial court granted, without prejudice, the City’s and Board of Trustee’s motions to dismiss the complaint because the appellants had failed to exhaust their administrative remedies. We affirm.
We have examined the pleadings and record in this ease and agree with the trial court that the matters raised in the complaint should first be brought under the Florida Administrative Procedures Act, Chapter 120, Florida Statutes (1993). See State ex rel. Dept. of General Services v. Willis, 344 So. 2d 580 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977). We take judicial notice of the fact that the appellants have been allowed to intervene in the administrative proceedings pending between the City and the Division of Retirement where the City’s failure to comply with Chapter 175, Florida Statutes (1993) is being litigated. We note that the trial court’s order of dismissal was without prejudice to the appellants to seek relief in circuit court after exhaustion of their administrative remedies. If after exhausting administrative remedies the parties seek relief in the circuit court, the trial court should reexamine the applicability of section 112.66(5), Florida Statutes (1993).
Affirmed.
PATTERSON and ALTENBERND, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- State of Fla. ex rel. Dep't OF Gen. Servs. v. Willis, 344 So. 2d 580 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977)